1. With wisdom both ancient and brand-new (cf. Mt. 13:52), we are contacted us to assess the present difficulties and chances presented by scientific and technological improvements, particularly by the current advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Christian tradition regards the present of intelligence as a necessary aspect of how people are created "in the image of God" (Gen. 1:27). Beginning with an essential vision of the human person and the biblical contacting us to "till" and "keep" the earth (Gen. 2:15), the Church emphasizes that this gift of intelligence should be expressed through the accountable use of reason and technical abilities in the stewardship of the created world.

2. The Church encourages the development of science, innovation, the arts, and other forms of human venture, viewing them as part of the "cooperation of males and female with God in refining the visible creation." [1] As Sirach verifies, God "provided ability to humans, that he may be glorified in his wonderful works" (Sir. 38:6). Human capabilities and imagination originate from God and, when utilized rightly, glorify God by reflecting his wisdom and goodness. Due to this, when we ask ourselves what it suggests to "be human," we can not omit a factor to consider of our clinical and technological abilities.

3. It is within this viewpoint that the present Note addresses the anthropological and ethical challenges raised by AI-issues that are particularly considerable, as one of the goals of this technology is to mimic the human intelligence that developed it. For instance, unlike many other human creations, AI can be trained on the outcomes of human creativity and then create new "artifacts" with a level of speed and skill that often matches or surpasses what people can do, such as producing text or images indistinguishable from human compositions. This raises vital issues about AI's prospective role in the growing crisis of reality in the general public forum. Moreover, this technology is created to discover and make certain choices autonomously, adapting to new situations and supplying solutions not anticipated by its developers, and thus, it raises essential questions about ethical responsibility and human security, with more comprehensive ramifications for society as a whole. This brand-new circumstance has actually triggered numerous individuals to reflect on what it suggests to be human and the function of humankind on the planet.

4. Taking all this into account, there is broad consensus that AI marks a brand-new and significant stage in humanity's engagement with technology, positioning it at the heart of what Pope Francis has explained as an "epochal modification." [2] Its effect is felt globally and in a large range of areas, consisting of interpersonal relationships, education, work, art, health care, law, warfare, and international relations. As AI advances quickly toward even higher achievements, it is critically important to consider its anthropological and ethical implications. This involves not just mitigating threats and preventing harm however likewise making sure that its applications are utilized to promote human development and the common good.

5. To contribute favorably to the discernment relating to AI, and in reaction to Pope Francis' require a renewed "wisdom of heart," [3] the Church offers its experience through the anthropological and ethical reflections contained in this Note. Committed to its active role in the global discussion on these issues, the Church welcomes those entrusted with sending the faith-including parents, teachers, pastors, and bishops-to devote themselves to this vital subject with care and attention. While this document is meant particularly for them, it is likewise indicated to be available to a broader audience, especially those who share the conviction that scientific and technological advances ought to be directed towards serving the human individual and the typical good. [4]
6. To this end, the document begins by comparing concepts of intelligence in AI and in human intelligence. It then explores the Christian understanding of human intelligence, providing a structure rooted in the Church's philosophical and doctrinal tradition. Finally, the document provides standards to make sure that the development and usage of AI maintain human self-respect and promote the integral development of the human individual and society.

7. The principle of "intelligence" in AI has evolved in time, drawing on a variety of ideas from various disciplines. While its origins extend back centuries, a considerable milestone happened in 1956 when the American computer system researcher John McCarthy arranged a summer workshop at Dartmouth University to explore the issue of "Artificial Intelligence," which he specified as "that of making a machine act in methods that would be called intelligent if a human were so behaving." [5] This workshop introduced a research study program focused on developing devices capable of carrying out jobs usually related to the human intellect and intelligent behavior.

8. Ever since, AI research has actually advanced quickly, resulting in the development of complex systems capable of carrying out highly advanced jobs. [6] These so-called "narrow AI" systems are typically designed to manage specific and limited functions, such as translating languages, predicting the trajectory of a storm, classifying images, responding to concerns, or producing visual content at the user's demand. While the meaning of "intelligence" in AI research study varies, a lot of contemporary AI systems-particularly those utilizing machine learning-rely on analytical inference rather than logical deduction. By analyzing big datasets to determine patterns, AI can "forecast" [7] outcomes and propose new methods, simulating some cognitive processes common of human analytical. Such achievements have actually been enabled through advances in computing technology (including neural networks, unsupervised artificial intelligence, and evolutionary algorithms) as well as hardware innovations (such as specialized processors). Together, these technologies allow AI systems to respond to various kinds of human input, adjust to new situations, and even recommend novel solutions not expected by their original developers. [8]
9. Due to these quick advancements, numerous jobs once managed solely by people are now entrusted to AI. These systems can augment or perhaps supersede what people are able to perform in lots of fields, especially in specialized locations such as data analysis, image acknowledgment, and medical diagnosis. While each "narrow AI" application is designed for a particular task, many scientists aim to develop what is known as "Artificial General Intelligence" (AGI)-a single system efficient in running throughout all cognitive domains and carrying out any task within the scope of human intelligence. Some even argue that AGI could one day attain the state of "superintelligence," surpassing human intellectual capacities, or add to "super-longevity" through advances in biotechnology. Others, however, fear that these possibilities, even if hypothetical, might one day eclipse the human person, while still others invite this possible improvement. [9]
10. Underlying this and many other point of views on the subject is the implicit assumption that the term "intelligence" can be utilized in the very same method to refer to both human intelligence and AI. Yet, this does not capture the complete scope of the concept. In the case of human beings, intelligence is a faculty that pertains to the person in his or her totality, whereas in the context of AI, "intelligence" is comprehended functionally, often with the anticipation that the activities quality of the human mind can be broken down into digitized steps that makers can replicate. [10]
11. This practical viewpoint is exhibited by the "Turing Test," which considers a device "intelligent" if a person can not distinguish its behavior from that of a human. [11] However, in this context, the term "behavior" refers only to the efficiency of particular intellectual tasks; it does not account for the full breadth of human experience, which includes abstraction, feelings, imagination, and the visual, moral, and religious perceptiveness. Nor does it incorporate the complete variety of expressions characteristic of the human mind. Instead, in the case of AI, the "intelligence" of a system is examined methodologically, however also reductively, based on its ability to produce suitable responses-in this case, those connected with the human intellect-regardless of how those actions are created.

12. AI's advanced functions give it advanced abilities to perform jobs, but not the ability to believe. [12] This distinction is crucially essential, as the method "intelligence" is defined undoubtedly forms how we understand the relationship between human idea and this technology. [13] To appreciate this, one need to remember the richness of the philosophical custom and Christian faith, which offer a much deeper and more detailed understanding of intelligence-an understanding that is main to the Church's mentor on the nature, dignity, and occupation of the human person. [14]
13. From the dawn of human self-reflection, the mind has actually played a main function in understanding what it implies to be "human." Aristotle observed that "all individuals by nature desire to know." [15] This knowledge, with its capability for abstraction that comprehends the nature and significance of things, sets humans apart from the animal world. [16] As thinkers, theologians, and psychologists have examined the exact nature of this intellectual faculty, they have likewise checked out how humans understand the world and their unique place within it. Through this exploration, the Christian tradition has actually pertained to understand 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 frequently understood through the complementary concepts of "factor" (ratio) and "intellect" (intellectus). These are not different faculties however, as Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, they are 2 modes in which the exact same intelligence runs: "The term intelligence is inferred from the inward grasp of the truth, while the name reason is taken from the inquisitive and discursive procedure." [18] This concise description highlights the 2 fundamental and complementary dimensions of human intelligence. Intellectus describes the intuitive grasp of the truth-that is, nabbing it with the "eyes" of the mind-which precedes and premises argumentation itself. Ratio pertains to thinking appropriate: the discursive, analytical procedure that results in judgment. Together, intelligence and factor form the two 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 specific mode of idea; rather, it recognizes that the ability for intellectual understanding shapes and permeates all aspects of human activity. [20] Whether exercised well or improperly, this capacity is an intrinsic element of human nature. In this sense, the "term 'reasonable' includes all the capabilities of the human person," consisting of those related to "understanding and understanding, along with those of willing, caring, picking, and preferring; it likewise consists of all corporeal functions carefully associated to these capabilities." [21] This detailed perspective underscores how, in the human person, created in the "picture of God," factor is incorporated in such a way that raises, shapes, and transforms both the individual's will and actions. [22]
16. Christian thought considers the intellectual faculties of the human person within the framework of an integral sociology that sees the human being as essentially embodied. In the human person, spirit and matter "are not two natures joined, however rather their union forms a single nature." [23] Simply put, the soul is not merely the immaterial "part" of the individual contained within the body, nor is the body an outer shell real estate an intangible "core." Rather, the whole human individual is concurrently both product and spiritual. This understanding shows the teaching of Sacred Scripture, which sees the human person as a being who lives out relationships with God and others (and thus, an authentically spiritual dimension) within and through this embodied existence. [24] The profound meaning of this condition is further brightened by the mystery of the Incarnation, through which God himself handled our flesh and "raised it as much as a sublime self-respect." [25]
17. Although deeply rooted in bodily existence, the human person goes beyond the material world through the soul, which is "almost on the horizon of eternity and time." [26] The intelligence's capability for transcendence and the self-possessed freedom of the will come from the soul, by which the human person "shares in the light of the divine mind." [27] Nevertheless, the human spirit does not exercise its regular mode of understanding without the body. [28] In this way, the intellectual faculties of the human individual are an essential part of an anthropology that recognizes that the human individual is a "unity of body and soul." [29] Further elements of this understanding will be established in what follows.

18. People are "purchased by their very nature to social communion," [30] having the capacity to know one another, to give themselves in love, and to participate in communion with others. Accordingly, human intelligence is not a separated faculty however is exercised in relationships, discovering its max expression in discussion, collaboration, and solidarity. We discover with others, and we discover through others.

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

21. Human intelligence is eventually "God's present fashioned for the assimilation of truth." [34] In the double sense of intellectus-ratio, it makes it possible for the person to check out realities that surpass mere sensory experience or energy, because "the desire for fact is part of human nature itself. It is an inherent property of human factor to ask why things are as they are." [35] Moving beyond the limitations of empirical information, human intelligence can "with authentic certitude attain to reality itself as knowable." [36] While reality remains just partly known, the desire for reality "stimulates factor constantly to go even more; certainly, it is as if reason were overwhelmed to see that it can always exceed what it has currently attained." [37] Although Truth in itself transcends the limits of human intelligence, it irresistibly attracts it. [38] Drawn by this tourist attraction, the human individual is caused look for "facts of a greater order." [39]
22. This innate drive toward the pursuit of reality is specifically apparent in the distinctly human capabilities for semantic understanding and imagination, [40] through which this search unfolds in a "way that is appropriate to the social nature and self-respect of the human person." [41] Likewise, an unfaltering orientation to the fact is necessary for charity to be both genuine and universal. [42]
23. The search for reality discovers its greatest expression in openness to realities that go beyond the physical and created world. In God, all truths attain their supreme and original significance. [43] Entrusting oneself to God is a "essential decision that engages the whole individual." [44] In this way, the human person ends up being fully what he or she is contacted us to be: "the intelligence and the will show their spiritual nature," enabling the individual "to act in such a way that understands personal liberty to the complete." [45]
24. The Christian faith comprehends creation as the complimentary act of the Triune God, who, as Saint Bonaventure of Bagnoregio explains, develops "not to increase his glory, but to reveal it forth and to communicate it." [46] Since God develops according to his Wisdom (cf. Wis. 9:9; Jer. 10:12), creation is imbued with an intrinsic order that reflects God's plan (cf. Gen. 1; Dan. 2:21 -22; Is. 45:18; Ps. 74:12 -17; 104), [47] within which God has actually called human beings to presume a distinct function: to cultivate and take care of the world. [48]
25. Shaped by the Divine Craftsman, people live out their identity as beings made in imago Dei by "keeping" and "tilling" (cf. Gen. 2:15) creation-using their intelligence and abilities to take care of and develop 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 ultimate function in him. [51] Moreover, people are called to establish their capabilities in science and technology, for through them, God is glorified (cf. Sir. 38:6). Thus, in an appropriate relationship with creation, people, on the one hand, use their intelligence and skill to comply with God in assisting creation towards the function to which he has actually called it. [52] On the other hand, production itself, as Saint Bonaventure observes, assists the human mind to "ascend gradually to the supreme Principle, who is God." [53]
26. In this context, human intelligence ends up being more plainly understood as a professors that forms an integral part of how the entire individual engages with truth. Authentic engagement requires welcoming the full scope of one's being: spiritual, cognitive, embodied, and relational.

27. This engagement with reality unfolds in numerous methods, as each person, in his or her diverse individuality [54], seeks to comprehend the world, relate to others, fix problems, reveal imagination, and pursue essential wellness through the harmonious interplay of the numerous dimensions of the individual's intelligence. [55] This involves logical and linguistic capabilities but can also encompass other modes of interacting with reality. Consider the work of an artisan, who "should understand how to determine, in inert matter, a specific form that others can not recognize" [56] and bring it forth through insight and practical skill. Indigenous individuals who live near the earth frequently have an extensive sense of nature and its cycles. [57] Similarly, a pal who knows the right word to state or an individual adept at handling human relationships exhibits an intelligence that is "the fruit of self-examination, dialogue and generous encounter between persons." [58] As Pope Francis observes, "in this age of expert system, we can not forget that poetry and love are essential to save our mankind." [59]
28. At the heart of the Christian understanding of intelligence is the combination of fact into the moral and spiritual life of the person, assisting his or her actions in light of God's goodness and reality. According to God's strategy, intelligence, in its max sense, also includes the ability to relish what is real, good, and stunning. As the twentieth-century French poet Paul Claudel revealed, "intelligence is absolutely nothing without pleasure." [60] Similarly, Dante, upon reaching the highest heaven in Paradiso, testifies that the conclusion of this intellectual pleasure is found in the "light intellectual full of love, love of true great filled with delight, pleasure which transcends every sweet taste." [61]
29. A correct understanding of human intelligence, therefore, can not be reduced to the simple acquisition of facts or the ability to carry out specific tasks. Instead, it involves the person's openness to the supreme concerns of life and shows an orientation towards the True and the Good. [62] As an expression of the magnificent image within the person, human intelligence has the capability to access the totality of being, considering existence in its fullness, which surpasses what is measurable, and understanding the meaning of what has been understood. For followers, this capacity consists of, in a specific way, the ability to grow in the knowledge of the mysteries of God by utilizing factor to engage ever more exceptionally with revealed truths (intellectus fidei). [63] True intelligence is shaped by divine love, which "is put forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 5:5). From this, it follows that human intelligence possesses an important contemplative dimension, an unselfish openness to the True, the Good, and the Beautiful, beyond any practical purpose.

30. Due to the foregoing conversation, the differences between human intelligence and present AI systems end up being evident. While AI is an extraordinary technological accomplishment efficient in imitating certain outputs connected with human intelligence, it runs by performing jobs, attaining goals, or making choices based on quantitative information and computational reasoning. For instance, with its analytical power, AI excels at incorporating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and promoting interdisciplinary connections. In this method, it can help specialists collaborate in solving complicated problems that "can not be handled from a single perspective or from a single set of interests." [64]
31. However, even as AI procedures and replicates certain expressions of intelligence, it remains fundamentally restricted to a logical-mathematical structure, which imposes fundamental constraints. Human intelligence, on the other hand, develops organically throughout the individual's physical and mental growth, shaped by a myriad of lived experiences in the flesh. Although advanced AI systems can "learn" through procedures such as artificial intelligence, this sort of training is fundamentally various from the developmental growth of human intelligence, which is shaped by embodied experiences, consisting of sensory input, emotional actions, social interactions, and the special context of each moment. These elements shape and type individuals within their individual history.In contrast, AI, doing not have a physique, relies on computational reasoning and learning based on vast datasets that include tape-recorded human experiences and understanding.

32. Consequently, although AI can simulate aspects of human thinking and carry out particular tasks with extraordinary speed and effectiveness, its computational abilities represent just a portion of the more comprehensive capacities of the human mind. For circumstances, AI can not presently reproduce moral discernment or the capability to develop authentic relationships. Moreover, human intelligence is situated within a personally lived history of intellectual and ethical development that essentially forms the individual's viewpoint, including the physical, psychological, social, moral, and spiritual measurements of life. Since AI can not provide this fullness of understanding, approaches that rely exclusively on this innovation or treat it as the main ways of translating the world can cause "a loss of appreciation for the entire, for the relationships in between things, and for the more comprehensive horizon." [65]
33. Human intelligence is not mainly about finishing practical tasks but about understanding and actively engaging with truth in all its measurements; it is also efficient in surprising insights. Since AI lacks the richness of corporeality, relationality, and the openness of the human heart to reality and goodness, its capacities-though relatively limitless-are unparalleled with the human ability to understand reality. So much can be gained from an illness, an embrace of reconciliation, and even an easy sunset; certainly, many experiences we have as people open new horizons and offer the possibility of attaining new wisdom. No gadget, working entirely with data, can measure up to these and numerous other experiences present in our lives.

34. Drawing an extremely close equivalence between human intelligence and AI threats catching a functionalist viewpoint, where people are valued based on the work they can perform. However, a person's worth does not depend upon having particular skills, cognitive and technological achievements, or private success, however on the individual's fundamental self-respect, grounded in being created in the image of God. [66] This self-respect remains undamaged in all scenarios, including for those not able to exercise their capabilities, whether it be a coming child, an unconscious person, or an older person who is suffering. [67] It likewise underpins the custom of human rights (and, in particular, what are now called "neuro-rights"), which represent "a crucial point of merging in the look for commonalities" [68] and can, therefore, act as an essential ethical guide in discussions on the accountable advancement and usage of AI.

35. Considering all these points, as Pope Francis observes, "the extremely use of the word 'intelligence'" in connection with AI "can prove misleading" [69] and risks overlooking what is most precious in the human person. Due to this, AI needs to not be seen as an artificial type of human intelligence however as a product of it. [70]
36. Given these factors to consider, one can ask how AI can be understood within God's plan. To answer this, it is essential to recall that techno-scientific activity is not neutral in character however is a human endeavor that engages the humanistic and cultural measurements of human creativity. [71]
37. Viewed as a fruit of the potential engraved within human intelligence, [72] scientific inquiry and the advancement of technical skills are part of the "partnership of males and female with God in improving the visible development." [73] At the very same time, all clinical and technological achievements are, ultimately, gifts from God. [74] Therefore, human beings must constantly utilize their capabilities in view of the greater function for which God has actually granted them. [75]
38. We can gratefully acknowledge how innovation has "fixed many evils which utilized to damage and restrict people," [76] a reality for which we should rejoice. Nevertheless, not all technological advancements in themselves represent authentic human progress. [77] The Church is especially opposed to those applications that threaten the sanctity of life or the self-respect of the human person. [78] Like any human venture, technological development needs to be directed to serve the human individual and add to the pursuit of "higher justice, more extensive fraternity, and a more humane order of social relations," which are "more important than advances in the technical field." [79] Concerns about the ethical ramifications of technological development are shared not only within the Church but likewise among numerous scientists, technologists, and professional associations, who significantly require ethical reflection to guide this development in an accountable way.

39. To resolve these difficulties, it is vital to stress the significance of ethical duty grounded in the dignity and occupation of the human individual. This guiding concept likewise applies to questions worrying AI. In this context, the ethical measurement takes on main value since it is people who create systems and figure out the functions for which they are used. [80] Between a maker and a human being, only the latter is genuinely an ethical agent-a subject of ethical duty who exercises liberty in his/her decisions and accepts their effects. [81] It is not the device but the human who remains in relationship with truth and goodness, guided by an ethical conscience that calls the person "to like and to do what is good and to prevent evil," [82] bearing witness to "the authority of fact in referral to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn." [83] Likewise, in between a device and a human, only the human can be adequately self-aware to the point of listening and following the voice of conscience, discerning with prudence, and seeking the great that is possible in every scenario. [84] In reality, all of this also comes from the individual's workout of intelligence.

40. Like any product of human creativity, AI can be directed toward positive or negative ends. [85] When utilized in manner ins which appreciate human self-respect and promote the wellness of individuals and neighborhoods, it can contribute positively to the human occupation. Yet, as in all areas where humans are called to make decisions, the shadow of evil likewise looms here. Where human flexibility enables the possibility of choosing what is wrong, the ethical examination of this technology will need to consider how it is directed and used.

41. At the very same time, it is not just completions that are fairly significant however also the ways utilized to attain them. Additionally, the general vision and understanding of the human person ingrained within these systems are very important to think about as well. Technological items show the worldview of their designers, owners, users, and regulators, [86] and have the power to "shape the world and engage consciences on the level of worths." [87] On a societal level, some technological advancements might likewise enhance relationships and power dynamics that are irregular with a correct understanding of the human individual and society.

42. Therefore, the ends and the methods utilized in an offered application of AI, along with the total vision it integrates, need to all be examined to guarantee they appreciate human self-respect and promote the typical good. [88] As Pope Francis has specified, "the intrinsic dignity of every guy and every woman" must be "the essential criterion in evaluating emerging innovations; these will prove fairly sound to the degree that they assist respect that self-respect and increase its expression at every level of human life," [89] consisting of in the social and financial spheres. In this sense, human intelligence plays a vital role not just in creating and producing technology however also in directing its usage in line with the genuine good of the human person. [90] The responsibility for managing this carefully pertains to every level of society, guided by the concept of subsidiarity and other principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

43. The dedication to ensuring that AI constantly supports and promotes the supreme worth of the self-respect of every person and the fullness of the human occupation works as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains legitimate for every application of the technology at every level of its use.

44. An assessment of the implications of this guiding principle could start by thinking about the value of moral responsibility. Since complete ethical causality belongs just to individual agents, not artificial ones, it is important to be able to determine and specify who bears responsibility for the processes associated with AI, especially those efficient in learning, correction, and reprogramming. While bottom-up approaches and extremely deep neural networks enable AI to fix intricate problems, they make it difficult to comprehend the processes that result in the services they adopted. This complicates responsibility considering that if an AI application produces undesired outcomes, determining who is accountable becomes tough. To address this problem, attention needs to be provided to the nature of responsibility procedures in complex, highly automated settings, where outcomes might only become apparent in the medium to long term. For this, it is very important that supreme duty for decisions used AI rests with the human decision-makers which there is accountability for using AI at each phase of the decision-making process. [91]
45. In addition to determining who is responsible, it is vital to determine the goals provided to AI systems. Although these systems may utilize unsupervised autonomous learning mechanisms and in some cases follow courses that human beings can not reconstruct, they eventually pursue goals that human beings have assigned to them and are governed by procedures developed by their designers and developers. Yet, this presents an obstacle since, as AI designs become significantly efficient in independent knowing, the ability to maintain control over them to ensure that such applications serve human functions might effectively lessen. This raises the important question of how to make sure that AI systems are ordered for the good of people and not against them.

46. While responsibility for the ethical usage of AI systems starts with those who establish, produce, handle, and manage such systems, it is also shared by those who use them. As Pope Francis kept in mind, the machine "makes a technical choice among a number of possibilities based either on distinct criteria or on statistical inferences. Humans, however, not only pick, however in their hearts can deciding." [92] Those who utilize AI to achieve a job and follow its outcomes create a context in which they are eventually responsible for the power they have actually handed over. Therefore, insofar as AI can help people in making decisions, the algorithms that govern it must be trustworthy, safe and secure, robust enough to handle disparities, and transparent in their operation to alleviate predispositions and unintentional side results. [93] Regulatory frameworks should ensure that all legal entities remain accountable for making use of AI and all its repercussions, with proper safeguards for openness, privacy, and responsibility. [94] Moreover, those utilizing AI must be mindful not to end up being excessively reliant on it for their decision-making, a pattern that increases contemporary society's currently high reliance on technology.

47. The Church's moral and social teaching offers resources to assist make sure that AI is used in such a way that maintains human agency. Considerations about justice, for instance, need to also attend to issues such as promoting just social dynamics, maintaining global security, and promoting peace. By exercising vigilance, individuals and neighborhoods can determine ways to utilize AI to benefit humankind while avoiding applications that might break down human self-respect or harm the environment. In this context, the principle of responsibility should be comprehended not just in its most restricted sense however as a "duty for the care for others, which is more than merely representing outcomes attained." [95]
48. Therefore, AI, like any innovation, can be part of a mindful and responsible response to humankind's occupation to the excellent. However, as formerly discussed, AI must be directed by human intelligence to align with this occupation, guaranteeing it respects the self-respect of the human individual. Recognizing this "exalted dignity," the Second Vatican Council verified that "the social order and its advancement should invariably work to the advantage of the human person." [96] Because of this, using AI, as Pope Francis said, should be "accompanied by an ethic inspired by a vision of the typical great, a principles of flexibility, responsibility, and fraternity, capable of cultivating the complete development of individuals in relation to others and to the entire of creation." [97]
49. Within this basic perspective, some observations follow below to show how the preceding arguments can assist supply an ethical orientation in practical situations, in line with the "wisdom of heart" that Pope Francis has proposed. [98] While not extensive, this conversation is offered in service of the discussion that considers how AI can be used to maintain the self-respect of the human person and promote the common good. [99]
50. As Pope Francis observed, "the inherent self-respect of each person and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family should support the development of brand-new innovations and function as unassailable requirements for examining them before they are employed." [100]
51. Viewed through this lens, AI could "introduce crucial developments in farming, education and culture, an improved level of life for whole nations and individuals, and the development of human fraternity and social relationship," and hence be "utilized to promote integral human advancement." [101] AI could likewise assist organizations determine those in requirement and counter discrimination and marginalization. These and other comparable applications of this innovation might contribute to human development and the typical good. [102]
52. However, while AI holds numerous possibilities for promoting the good, it can also hinder and even counter human development and the typical good. Pope Francis has actually kept in mind that "proof to date recommends that digital technologies have actually increased inequality in our world. Not simply distinctions in material wealth, which are likewise substantial, but also distinctions in access to political and social influence." [103] In this sense, AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, produce new forms of poverty, expand the "digital divide," and worsen existing social inequalities. [104]
53. Moreover, the concentration of the power over mainstream AI applications in the hands of a few effective companies raises significant ethical issues. Exacerbating this issue is the intrinsic nature of AI systems, where no single person can exercise total oversight over the huge and complex datasets used for computation. This lack of distinct responsibility develops the risk that AI could be controlled for personal or corporate gain or to direct popular opinion for the advantage of a specific industry. Such entities, inspired by their own interests, have the capability to exercise "types of control as subtle as they are invasive, producing systems for the control of consciences and of the democratic procedure." [105]
54. Furthermore, there is the danger of AI being utilized to promote what Pope Francis has actually called the "technocratic paradigm," which views all the world's problems as solvable through technological methods alone. [106] In this paradigm, human self-respect and fraternity are often set aside in the name of efficiency, "as if truth, goodness, and reality automatically stream from technological and economic power as such." [107] Yet, human dignity and the common great must never be broken for the sake of performance, [108] for "technological developments that do not lead to an improvement in the lifestyle of all mankind, but on the contrary, worsen inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true progress. " [109] Instead, AI ought to be put "at the service of another type of development, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral." [110]
55. Attaining this goal needs a deeper reflection on the relationship between autonomy and responsibility. Greater autonomy heightens everyone's responsibility across various elements of common life. For Christians, the structure of this obligation depends on the recognition that all human capacities, consisting of the person's autonomy, come from God and are meant to be used in the service of others. [111] Therefore, rather than merely pursuing financial or technological objectives, AI needs to serve "the common good of the entire human household," which is "the amount overall of social conditions that permit people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their satisfaction more completely and more quickly." [112]
56. The Second Vatican Council observed that "by his inner nature guy is a social being; and if he does not enter into relations with others, he can neither live nor develop his gifts." [113] This conviction underscores that residing in society is intrinsic to the nature and vocation of the human individual. [114] As social beings, we look for relationships that involve mutual exchange and the pursuit of reality, in the course of which, individuals "share with each other the fact they have found, or believe they have actually found, in such a method that they assist one another in the search for fact." [115]
57. Such a quest, together with other elements of human communication, presupposes encounters and mutual exchange between people shaped by their distinct histories, ideas, convictions, and relationships. Nor can we forget that human intelligence is a varied, diverse, and complicated truth: individual and social, rational and affective, conceptual and symbolic. Pope Francis highlights this vibrant, keeping in mind that "together, we can seek the truth in dialogue, in unwinded discussion or in enthusiastic dispute. To do so requires determination; it entails moments of silence and suffering, yet it can patiently embrace the wider experience of individuals and peoples. [...] The process of building fraternity, be it local or universal, can just be undertaken by spirits that are free and available to genuine encounters." [116]
58. It remains in this context that a person can consider the difficulties AI positions to human relationships. Like other technological tools, AI has the potential to foster connections within the human family. However, it could also impede a real encounter with reality and, eventually, lead individuals to "a deep and melancholic frustration with interpersonal relations, or a damaging sense of seclusion." [117] Authentic human relationships require the richness of being with others in their pain, their pleas, and their delight. [118] Since human intelligence is revealed and enhanced likewise in social and embodied methods, genuine and spontaneous encounters with others are essential for engaging with reality in its fullness.

59. Because "true wisdom requires an encounter with truth," [119] the increase of AI introduces another challenge. Since AI can efficiently mimic the items of human intelligence, the capability to know when one is communicating with a human or a device can no longer be considered given. Generative AI can produce text, speech, images, and other sophisticated outputs that are usually related to human beings. Yet, it needs to be understood for what it is: a tool, not a person. [120] This difference is often obscured by the language utilized by professionals, which tends to anthropomorphize AI and therefore blurs the line between human and device.

60. Anthropomorphizing AI also presents particular difficulties for the advancement of kids, potentially motivating them to establish patterns of interaction that deal with human relationships in a transactional way, as one would associate with a chatbot. Such routines might lead young individuals to see instructors as mere dispensers of details rather than as mentors who assist and support their intellectual and ethical growth. Genuine relationships, rooted in empathy and a steadfast commitment to the good of the other, are necessary and irreplaceable in promoting the complete advancement of the human person.

61. In this context, it is essential to clarify that, in spite of the use of anthropomorphic language, no AI application can genuinely experience empathy. Emotions can not be reduced to facial expressions or expressions created in action to prompts; they reflect the method a person, as an entire, relates to the world and to his/her own life, with the body playing a main function. True empathy requires the capability to listen, recognize another's irreducible originality, invite their otherness, and comprehend the significance behind even their silences. [121] Unlike the world of analytical judgment in which AI stands out, true empathy belongs to the relational sphere. It involves intuiting and apprehending the lived experiences of another while maintaining the distinction between self and other. [122] While AI can imitate empathetic actions, it can not duplicate the incomparably personal and relational nature of genuine compassion. [123]
62. In light of the above, it is clear why misrepresenting AI as an individual ought to constantly be prevented; doing so for deceitful functions is a severe ethical infraction that might 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 thought about immoral and requires cautious oversight to avoid harm, maintain transparency, and ensure the self-respect of all individuals. [124]
63. In an increasingly separated world, some individuals have actually turned to AI in search of deep human relationships, simple friendship, or even emotional bonds. However, while human beings are indicated to experience authentic relationships, AI can only replicate them. Nevertheless, such relationships with others are an important part of how a person grows to become who he or she is suggested to be. If AI is used to assist people foster authentic connections between people, it can contribute favorably to the complete awareness of the person. Conversely, if we replace relationships with God and with others with interactions with innovation, we run the risk of replacing genuine relationality with a lifeless image (cf. Ps. 106:20; Rom. 1:22 -23). Instead of pulling away into synthetic worlds, we are contacted us to take part in a committed and intentional method with reality, particularly by recognizing with the poor and suffering, consoling those in sorrow, and creating bonds of communion with all.

64. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, AI is being increasingly integrated into financial and financial systems. Significant investments are presently being made not just in the innovation sector however likewise in energy, financing, and media, particularly in the locations of marketing and sales, logistics, technological development, compliance, and risk management. At the very same time, AI's applications in these areas have actually likewise highlighted its ambivalent nature, as a source of incredible opportunities but likewise profound risks. A very first genuine crucial point in this area concerns 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 value developed by AI rather than the organizations that utilize it.

65. Other broader aspects of AI's effect on the economic-financial sphere need to also be thoroughly examined, particularly concerning the interaction in between concrete reality and the digital world. One crucial factor to consider in this regard includes the coexistence of diverse and alternative kinds of economic and banks within a given context. This element ought to be encouraged, as it can bring benefits in how it supports the real economy by cultivating its advancement and stability, specifically throughout times of crisis. Nevertheless, it should be worried that digital truths, not restricted by any spatial bonds, tend to be more homogeneous and impersonal than communities rooted in a specific place and a particular history, with a common journey defined by shared worths and hopes, however likewise by unavoidable disagreements and divergences. This variety is an indisputable asset to a community's economic life. Turning over the economy and financing totally to digital technology would lower this variety and richness. As an outcome, numerous options to economic issues that can be reached through natural discussion in between the involved celebrations might no longer be attainable in a world controlled by procedures and only the look of nearness.

66. Another location where AI is already having a profound impact is the world of work. As in numerous other fields, AI is driving basic improvements across numerous professions, with a series of effects. On the one hand, it has the prospective to boost proficiency and performance, create new tasks, allow workers to concentrate on more ingenious jobs, and open brand-new horizons for creativity and development.

67. However, while AI assures to improve productivity by taking control of ordinary tasks, it frequently forces workers to adjust to the speed and needs of machines instead of machines being developed to support those who work. As a result, contrary to the marketed advantages of AI, present techniques to the technology can paradoxically deskill workers, subject them to automated surveillance, and relegate them to stiff and repeated tasks. The need to stay up to date with the pace of technology can deteriorate employees' sense of firm and suppress the innovative capabilities they are anticipated to bring to their work. [125]
68. AI is presently removing the need for some jobs that were once performed by human beings. If AI is utilized to replace human workers rather than complement them, there is a "considerable threat of out of proportion advantage for the couple of at the rate of the impoverishment of numerous." [126] Additionally, as AI ends up being more powerful, there is an involved risk that human labor might lose its value in the financial world. This is the rational repercussion of the technocratic paradigm: a world of mankind shackled to efficiency, where, eventually, the cost of mankind must be cut. Yet, human lives are intrinsically valuable, independent of their financial output. Nevertheless, the "current design," Pope Francis explains, "does not appear to prefer an investment in efforts to help the sluggish, the weak, or the less gifted to find chances in life." [127] Because of this, "we can not permit a tool as powerful and indispensable as Artificial Intelligence to strengthen 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 should be subordinate to the order of individuals, and not the other way around." [129] Human work should not just be at the service of revenue however at "the service of the entire human individual [...] taking into consideration the person's product needs and the requirements of his or her intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and spiritual life." [130] In this context, the Church acknowledges that work is "not just a way of earning one's daily bread" however is also "a necessary dimension of social life" and "a way [...] of individual growth, the building of healthy relationships, self-expression and the exchange of presents. Work gives us a sense of shared duty for the development of the world, and eventually, for our life as a people." [131]
70. Since work is a "part of the significance of life on this earth, a path to development, human advancement and personal satisfaction," "the objective must not be that technological progress increasingly replaces human work, for this would be detrimental to humankind" [132] -rather, it should promote human labor. Seen in this light, AI should assist, not replace, human judgment. Similarly, it needs to never break down imagination or decrease employees to simple "cogs in a machine." Therefore, "regard for the dignity of laborers and the significance of work for the financial wellness of individuals, households, and societies, for task security and just wages, should be a high concern for the international community as these types of innovation permeate more deeply into our work environments." [133]
71. As participants in God's recovery work, health care professionals have the occupation and obligation to be "guardians and servants of human life." [134] Because of this, the health care profession carries an "intrinsic and indisputable ethical dimension," recognized by the Hippocratic Oath, which requires doctors and health care specialists to dedicate themselves to having "absolute respect for human life and its sacredness." [135] Following the example of the Good Samaritan, this dedication is to be performed by males and females "who reject the creation of a society of exemption, and act instead as neighbors, raising up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the common good." [136]
72. Seen in this light, AI seems to hold tremendous capacity in a variety of applications in the medical field, such as helping the diagnostic work of doctor, facilitating relationships in between clients and medical staff, providing brand-new treatments, and broadening access to quality care likewise for those who are isolated or marginalized. In these methods, the technology might enhance the "thoughtful and loving closeness" [137] that healthcare suppliers are called to encompass the ill and suffering.

73. However, if AI is used not to enhance but to change the relationship between patients and healthcare providers-leaving clients to connect with a device rather than a human being-it would decrease a crucially important human relational structure to a central, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging uniformity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would run the risk of getting worse the solitude that often accompanies illness, especially in the context of a culture where "individuals are no longer viewed as a paramount worth to be taken care of and appreciated." [138] This abuse of AI would not line up with respect for the self-respect of the human person and solidarity with the suffering.

74. Responsibility for the wellness of clients and the choices that touch upon their lives are at the heart of the healthcare profession. This responsibility needs physician to work out all their skill and intelligence in making well-reasoned and fairly grounded options regarding those turned over to their care, constantly respecting the inviolable dignity of the clients and the need for notified authorization. As a result, decisions regarding patient treatment and the weight of responsibility they entail must constantly remain with the human person and must never ever be handed over to AI. [139]
75. In addition, using AI to determine who need to get treatment based mainly on economic measures or metrics of effectiveness represents a particularly troublesome circumstances of the "technocratic paradigm" that must be turned down. [140] For, "optimizing resources suggests utilizing them in an ethical and fraternal way, and not punishing the most delicate." [141] Additionally, AI tools in health care are "exposed to kinds of predisposition and discrimination," where "systemic mistakes can easily multiply, producing not only oppressions in specific cases however also, due to the cause and effect, real types of social inequality." [142]
76. The combination of AI into health care also presents the threat of amplifying other existing disparities in access to medical care. As healthcare ends up being progressively oriented towards avoidance and lifestyle-based techniques, AI-driven options might accidentally favor more wealthy populations who already take pleasure in better access to medical resources and quality nutrition. This pattern threats reinforcing a "medication for the abundant" model, where those with monetary ways gain from advanced preventative tools and individualized health details while others battle to gain access to even basic services. To prevent such inequities, fair structures are required to ensure that making use of AI in healthcare does not get worse 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 individuals with a view toward their last end and the good of the society to which they belong." [143] As such, education is "never a simple process of handing down truths and intellectual abilities: rather, its aim is to add to the individual's holistic development in its numerous aspects (intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and so on), including, for instance, neighborhood life and relations within the scholastic community," [144] in keeping with the nature and self-respect of the human person.

78. This technique includes a dedication to cultivating the mind, however always as a part of the integral advancement of the person: "We must break that idea of education which holds that informing means filling one's head with concepts. That is the way we educate robots, cerebral minds, not individuals. Educating is taking a threat in the tension in between the mind, the heart, and the hands." [145]
79. At the center of this work of forming the entire human person is the essential relationship in between instructor and trainee. Teachers do more than convey understanding; they design essential human qualities and inspire the happiness of discovery. [146] Their existence inspires trainees both through the content they teach and the care they demonstrate for their trainees. This bond fosters trust, shared understanding, and the capacity to resolve everyone's distinct dignity and capacity. On the part of the trainee, this can produce an authentic desire to grow. The physical existence of an instructor develops a relational dynamic that AI can not reproduce, one that deepens engagement and supports the trainee's important advancement.

80. In this context, AI presents both chances and difficulties. If used in a sensible way, within the context of an existing teacher-student relationship and purchased to the authentic goals of education, AI can become a valuable academic resource by enhancing access to education, using tailored support, and offering immediate feedback to trainees. These benefits could improve the knowing experience, especially in cases where personalized attention is required, or academic resources are otherwise scarce.

81. Nevertheless, a vital part of education is forming "the intellect to reason well in all matters, to connect towards fact, and to comprehend it," [147] while helping the "language of the head" to grow harmoniously with the "language of the heart" and the "language of the hands." [148] This is even more important in an age marked by technology, in which "it is no longer merely a question of 'using' instruments of communication, but of residing in a highly digitalized culture that has actually had a profound effect on [...] our ability to communicate, discover, be notified and participate in relationship with others." [149] However, rather of fostering "a cultivated intelligence," which "brings with it a power and a grace to every work and occupation that it carries out," [150] the comprehensive use of AI in education might cause the trainees' increased reliance on innovation, eroding their capability to perform some skills individually and worsening their reliance on screens. [151]
82. Additionally, while some AI systems are created to assist individuals develop their vital thinking capabilities and problem-solving abilities, many others merely offer responses instead of triggering trainees to get here at answers themselves or write text on their own. [152] Instead of training youths how to amass details and generate fast reactions, education ought to motivate "the accountable use of freedom to face concerns with excellent sense and intelligence." [153] Building on this, "education in the usage of forms of artificial intelligence ought to aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of any ages, but particularly the young, require to establish a discerning approach to making use of information and content collected on the web or produced by artificial intelligence systems. Schools, universities, and scientific societies are challenged to help trainees and specialists to understand the social and ethical aspects of the development and usages of technology." [154]
83. As Saint John Paul II remembered, "worldwide today, identified by such rapid developments in science and innovation, the jobs of a Catholic University assume an ever higher importance and seriousness." [155] In a particular method, Catholic universities are urged to be present as excellent laboratories of hope at this crossroads of history. In an inter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary secret, they are advised to engage "with knowledge and imagination" [156] in careful research on this phenomenon, assisting 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 common great, reaching brand-new frontiers in the discussion between faith and factor.

84. Moreover, it should be kept in mind that current AI programs have actually been understood to provide prejudiced or produced details, which can lead trainees to trust unreliable material. This issue "not only runs the threat of legitimizing fake news and enhancing a dominant culture's benefit, however, in short, it likewise weakens the instructional procedure itself." [157] With time, clearer distinctions might emerge between appropriate and incorrect usages of AI in education and research study. Yet, a definitive standard is that the use of AI ought to always be transparent and never misrepresented.

85. AI might be utilized as an aid to human dignity if it assists individuals comprehend complex principles or directs them to sound resources that support their search for the fact. [158]
86. However, AI also presents a severe danger of producing manipulated content and false details, which can quickly misguide individuals due to its similarity to the truth. Such false information might take place accidentally, as when it comes to AI "hallucination," where a generative AI system yields results that appear genuine but are not. Since creating content that mimics human artifacts is main to AI's performance, reducing these threats shows tough. Yet, the consequences of such aberrations and incorrect details can be rather severe. For this factor, all those involved in producing and utilizing AI systems ought to be committed to the truthfulness and precision of the details processed by such systems and disseminated to the general public.

87. While AI has a hidden capacity to generate incorrect details, an even more troubling problem depends on the deliberate misuse of AI for adjustment. This can happen when people or organizations intentionally produce and spread incorrect content with the aim to trick or cause damage, such as "deepfake" images, videos, and audio-referring to a false depiction of a person, edited or produced by an AI algorithm. The threat of deepfakes is particularly obvious when they are used to target or damage others. While the images or videos themselves may be synthetic, the damage they cause is genuine, leaving "deep scars in the hearts of those who suffer it" and "genuine injuries in their human self-respect." [159]
88. On a broader scale, by misshaping "our relationship with others and with reality," [160] AI-generated fake media can slowly undermine the foundations of society. This problem needs careful policy, as misinformation-especially through AI-controlled or influenced media-can spread inadvertently, sustaining political polarization and social unrest. When society ends up being indifferent to the fact, different groups construct their own versions of "truths," compromising the "reciprocal ties and mutual dependences" [161] that underpin the fabric of social life. As deepfakes cause individuals to question whatever and AI-generated false content deteriorates trust in what they see and hear, polarization and dispute will just grow. Such prevalent deception is no unimportant matter; it strikes at the core of humanity, taking apart the foundational trust on which societies are developed. [162]
89. Countering AI-driven fallacies is not only the work of market experts-it needs the efforts of all people of goodwill. "If innovation is to serve human self-respect and not damage it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human neighborhood needs to be proactive in dealing with these patterns with regard to human self-respect and the promotion of the great." [163] Those who produce and share AI-generated material needs to always work out diligence in confirming the truth of what they disseminate and, in all cases, ought to "avoid the sharing of words and images that are deteriorating of human beings, that promote hatred and intolerance, that debase the goodness and intimacy of human sexuality or that exploit the weak and susceptible." [164] This calls for the ongoing vigilance and careful discernment of all users concerning their activity online. [165]
90. Humans are naturally relational, and the data everyone generates in the digital world can be viewed as an objectified expression of this relational nature. Data conveys not just details however also individual and relational knowledge, which, in a significantly digitized context, can total up to power over the person. Moreover, while some kinds of data might pertain to public elements of an individual's life, others might touch upon the person's interiority, possibly even their conscience. Seen in this way, privacy plays a vital role in securing the boundaries of a person's inner life, maintaining their liberty to relate to others, reveal themselves, and make choices without undue control. This security is also connected to the defense of religious liberty, as monitoring can also be misused to apply control over the lives of followers and how they reveal their faith.

91. It is proper, for that reason, to attend to the concern of privacy from an issue for the genuine flexibility and inalienable self-respect of the human person "in all circumstances." [166] The Second Vatican Council consisted of the right "to secure privacy" among the basic rights "needed for living a truly human life," a right that must be extended to all individuals on account of their "sublime self-respect." [167] Furthermore, the Church has also affirmed the right to the legitimate respect for a private life in the context of verifying the person's right to a good credibility, defense of their physical and mental stability, and liberty from damage or excessive invasion [168] -essential 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 presume patterns in a person's behavior and believing from even a percentage of details, making the function of information privacy much more necessary as a protect for the dignity and relational nature of the human person. As Pope Francis observed, "while closed and intolerant attitudes towards others are on the increase, ranges are otherwise diminishing or vanishing to the point that the right to privacy hardly exists. Everything has actually ended up being a sort of spectacle to be analyzed and examined, and people's lives are now under constant security." [170]
93. While there can be genuine and correct ways to use AI in keeping with human self-respect and the common good, using it for monitoring aimed at making use of, limiting others' flexibility, or benefitting a few at the expense of the many is unjustifiable. The threat of monitoring overreach should be monitored by appropriate regulators to guarantee transparency and public responsibility. Those accountable for security should never ever exceed their authority, which should constantly favor the dignity and freedom of every person as the necessary basis of a simply and humane society.

94. Furthermore, "fundamental regard for human self-respect needs that we refuse to allow the uniqueness of the person to be related to a set of information." [171] This specifically applies when AI is used to assess individuals or groups based upon their habits, qualities, or history-a practice understood as "social scoring": "In social and financial decision-making, we should be mindful about handing over judgments to algorithms that process data, often collected surreptitiously, on a person's makeup and previous behavior. Such data can be polluted by social prejudices and prejudgments. A person's past habits ought to not be utilized to reject him or her the chance to alter, grow, and contribute to society. We can not permit algorithms to limit or condition respect for human dignity, or to leave out compassion, mercy, forgiveness, and above all, the hope that individuals are able to change." [172]
95. AI has lots of promising applications for enhancing our relationship with our "common home," such as creating designs to forecast severe climate events, proposing engineering options to reduce their effect, handling relief operations, and predicting population shifts. [173] Additionally, AI can support sustainable farming, optimize energy use, and offer early caution systems for public health emergency situations. These advancements have the prospective to strengthen durability against climate-related challenges and promote more sustainable advancement.

96. At the very same time, current AI models and the hardware required to support them consume huge quantities of energy and water, significantly contributing to CO2 emissions and straining resources. This truth is typically obscured by the way this technology is provided in the popular creativity, where words such as "the cloud" [174] can offer the impression that information is stored and processed in an intangible world, separated from the physical world. However, "the cloud" is not an ethereal domain separate from the real world; as with all calculating technologies, it counts on physical machines, cables, and energy. The very same is real of the innovation behind AI. As these systems grow in complexity, particularly big language models (LLMs), they require ever-larger datasets, increased computational power, and greater storage facilities. Considering the heavy toll these technologies handle the environment, it is essential to establish sustainable options that minimize their effect on our common home.

97. Even then, as Pope Francis teaches, it is important "that we search for solutions not just in innovation however in a change of mankind." [175] A complete and authentic understanding of creation acknowledges that the value of all developed things can not be reduced to their simple utility. Therefore, a totally human approach to the stewardship of the earth declines the distorted anthropocentrism of the technocratic paradigm, which seeks to "extract whatever possible" from the world, [176] and turns down the "misconception of development," which assumes that "environmental problems will solve themselves simply with the application of brand-new technology and with no requirement for ethical considerations or deep change." [177] Such a state of mind needs to pave the way to a more holistic technique that appreciates the order of creation and promotes the important good of the human person while safeguarding our typical home. [178]
98. The Second Vatican Council and the consistent teaching of the Popes ever since have actually firmly insisted that peace is not merely the lack of war and is not restricted to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Instead, in the words of Saint Augustine, peace is "the serenity of order." [179] Certainly, peace can not be attained without safeguarding the products of persons, free communication, regard for the self-respect of individuals and individuals, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the work of justice and the result of charity and can not be attained through force alone; rather, it needs to be mainly constructed through patient diplomacy, the active promo of justice, solidarity, essential human development, and regard for the self-respect of all people. [180] In this method, the tools used to maintain peace should never be allowed to justify injustice, violence, or oppression. Instead, they must always be governed by a "firm determination to regard other individuals and countries, together with their dignity, as well as the purposeful practice of fraternity." [181]
99. While AI's analytical capabilities might assist countries look for peace and ensure security, the "weaponization of Artificial Intelligence" can likewise be extremely troublesome. Pope Francis has observed that "the ability to perform military operations through push-button control systems has actually resulted in a lessened perception of the devastation brought on by those weapon systems and the problem of responsibility for their use, leading to a a lot more cold and detached approach to the tremendous catastrophe of war." [182] Moreover, the ease with which self-governing weapons make war more practical militates against the concept of war as a last resort in genuine self-defense, [183] potentially increasing the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight and precipitating a destabilizing arms race, with devastating repercussions for human rights. [184]
100. In particular, Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, which are capable of recognizing and striking targets without direct human intervention, are a "cause for serious ethical issue" since they do not have the "unique human capability for moral judgment and ethical decision-making." [185] For this factor, Pope Francis has actually urgently required a reconsideration of the advancement of these weapons and a restriction on their usage, starting with "an efficient and concrete commitment to introduce ever higher and correct human control. No maker must ever pick to take the life of a human." [186]
101. Since it is a little step from devices that can eliminate autonomously with precision to those capable of massive damage, some AI researchers have expressed issues that such technology positions an "existential danger" by having the prospective to act in ways that might threaten the survival of entire areas or perhaps of humanity itself. This risk demands major attention, showing the enduring issue about innovations that grant war "an uncontrollable damaging power over terrific numbers of innocent civilians," [187] without even sparing kids. In this context, the call from Gaudium et Spes to "undertake an evaluation of war with a totally new attitude" [188] is more urgent than ever.

102. At the very same time, while the theoretical threats of AI should have attention, the more immediate and pressing issue depends on how people with malicious objectives might misuse this technology. [189] Like any tool, AI is an extension of human power, and while its future abilities are unpredictable, mankind's previous actions provide clear cautions. The atrocities devoted throughout history suffice to raise deep concerns about the potential abuses of AI.

103. Saint John Paul II observed that "humankind now has instruments of unmatched power: we can turn this world into a garden, or minimize it to a pile of debris." [190] Given this reality, the Church reminds us, in the words of Pope Francis, that "we are totally free to apply our intelligence towards things developing positively," or toward "decadence and shared damage." [191] To avoid mankind from spiraling into self-destruction, [192] there should be a clear stand against all applications of technology that inherently threaten human life and self-respect. This commitment needs mindful discernment about using AI, especially in military defense applications, to guarantee that it always respects human self-respect and serves the typical good. The development and implementation of AI in weaponries need to be subject to the greatest levels of ethical examination, governed by a concern for human dignity and the sanctity of life. [193]
104. Technology provides impressive tools to manage and establish the world's resources. However, in some cases, mankind is increasingly ceding control of these resources to devices. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial basic intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical type of AI that would match or exceed human intelligence and cause inconceivable improvements. Some even speculate that AGI could attain superhuman capabilities. At the exact same time, as society drifts away from a connection with the transcendent, some are lured to turn to AI searching for significance or fulfillment-longings that can only be truly pleased in communion with God. [194]
105. However, the presumption of 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 may show even more sexy than traditional idols for, unlike idols that "have mouths however do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, however do not hear" (Ps. 115:5 -6), AI can "speak," or a minimum of provides the impression of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15). Yet, it is important to bear in mind that AI is but 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 lot of the abilities specific to human life, and it is likewise imperfect. By turning to AI as a viewed "Other" higher than itself, with which to share existence and duties, humankind dangers producing a replacement for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, but humanity itself-which, in this method, ends up being enslaved to its own work. [195]
106. While AI has the possible to serve humankind and add to the common great, it remains a production of human hands, bearing "the imprint of human art and ingenuity" (Acts 17:29). It should never ever be ascribed undue worth. As the Book of Wisdom verifies: "For a man made them, and one whose spirit is obtained formed them; for no male can form a god which is like himself. He is mortal, and what he makes with lawless hands is dead, for he is much better than the things he worships given that he has life, however they never ever have" (Wis. 15:16 -17).

107. On the other hand, humans, "by their interior life, go beyond the whole product universe; they experience this deep interiority when they participate in their own heart, where God, who probes the heart, awaits them, and where they decide their own fate in the sight of God." [196] It is within the heart, as Pope Francis reminds us, that each specific finds the "mystical connection in between self-knowledge and openness to others, in between the encounter with one's personal individuality and the desire to provide oneself to others. " [197] Therefore, it is the heart alone that is "capable of setting our other powers and passions, and our entire person, in a stance of respect and caring obedience before the Lord," [198] who "provides to deal with each one people as a 'Thou,' always and forever." [199]
108. Considering the different difficulties posed by advances in technology, Pope Francis stressed the requirement for growth in "human responsibility, worths, and conscience," proportionate to the development in the capacity that this innovation brings [200] -acknowledging that "with a boost in human power comes an expanding of responsibility on the part of individuals and communities." [201]
109. At the exact same time, the "essential and basic question" remains "whether in the context of this progress man, as guy, is ending up being really better, that is to say, more fully grown spiritually, more conscious of the dignity of his humanity, more accountable, more available to others, especially the neediest and the weakest, and readier to provide and to aid all." [202]
110. As a result, it is essential to know how to assess individual applications of AI in specific contexts to determine whether its use promotes human self-respect, the vocation of the human individual, and the common good. Similar to lots of innovations, the impacts of the different uses of AI may not always be foreseeable from their inception. As these applications and their social impacts become clearer, proper reactions must be made at all levels of society, following the concept of subsidiarity. Individual users, families, civil society, corporations, organizations, governments, and worldwide companies must operate at their correct levels to make sure that AI is used for the good of all.

111. A significant obstacle and chance for the typical excellent today depends on thinking about AI within a framework of relational intelligence, which stresses the interconnectedness of people and neighborhoods and highlights our shared obligation for cultivating the essential well-being of others. The twentieth-century philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev observed that people frequently blame machines for individual and social issues; however, "this just embarrasses male and does not represent his dignity," for "it is not worthy to transfer duty from guy to a machine." [203] Only the human individual can be morally accountable, and the obstacles of a technological society are eventually spiritual in nature. Therefore, dealing with those difficulties "demands an increase of spirituality." [204]
112. A further point to consider is the call, triggered by the appearance of AI on the world stage, for a renewed appreciation of all that is human. Years back, the French Catholic author Georges Bernanos alerted that "the danger is not in the reproduction of machines, but in the ever-increasing number of males accustomed from their childhood to desire only what devices can provide." [205] This challenge is as real today as it was then, as the rapid pace of digitization runs the risk of a "digital reductionism," where non-quantifiable aspects of life are reserved and then forgotten and even considered irrelevant due to the fact that they can not be computed in official terms. AI ought to be used just as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than replace its richness. [206] Cultivating those elements of human life that transcend computation is crucial for maintaining "a genuine humankind" that "appears to dwell in the middle of our technological culture, practically unnoticed, like a mist seeping carefully underneath a closed door." [207]
113. The huge area of the world's understanding is now available in ways that would have filled past generations with wonder. However, to guarantee that developments in understanding do not become humanly or spiritually barren, one should surpass the mere build-up of information and aim to attain real wisdom. [208]
114. This wisdom is the present that mankind needs most to address the profound questions and ethical obstacles posed by AI: "Only by embracing a spiritual method of seeing truth, only by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we face and analyze the newness of our time." [209] Such "wisdom of the heart" is "the virtue that enables us to integrate the whole and its parts, our decisions and their consequences." It "can not be sought from machines," but it "lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who enjoy it; it prepares for those who prefer it, and it enters 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 "enables us to look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, events and to discover their real meaning." [211]
116. Since a "person's perfection is determined not by the details or understanding they possess, but by the depth of their charity," [212] how we incorporate AI "to consist of the least of our brothers and sis, the vulnerable, and those most in need, will be the real step of our humanity." [213] The "knowledge of the heart" can light up and direct the human-centered usage of this technology to help promote the typical good, look after our "common home," advance the look for the fact, foster essential human advancement, favor human solidarity and fraternity, and lead humankind to its supreme objective: joy and complete communion with God. [214]
117. From this perspective of knowledge, followers will be able to serve as moral agents capable of using this technology to promote a genuine vision of the human individual and society. [215] This should be done with the understanding that technological development becomes part of God's prepare for creation-an activity that we are contacted us to buy towards the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ, in the consistent search for the True and the Good.

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

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

Ex audientia pass away 14 ianuarii 2025 Franciscus

Contents

I. Introduction

II. What is Artificial Intelligence?

III. Intelligence in the Philosophical and Theological Tradition

Rationality

Embodiment

Relationality

Relationship with the Truth

Stewardship of the World

An Integral Understanding of Human Intelligence

The Limits of AI

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

Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making

V. Specific Questions

AI and Society

AI and Human Relationships

AI, the Economy, and Labor

AI and Healthcare

AI and Education

AI, Misinformation, Deepfakes, and Abuse

AI, Privacy, and Surveillance

AI and the Protection of Our Common Home

AI and Warfare

AI and Our Relationship with God

VI. Concluding Reflections

True Wisdom

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. See also Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. [2] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 307. Cf. Id., Christmas Greetings to the Roman Curia (21 December 2019): AAS 112 (2020 ), 43. [3] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [4] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 2293; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [5] J. McCarthy, et al., "A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence" (31 August 1955), http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/history/dartmouth/dartmouth.html (accessed: 21 October 2024). [6] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), pars. 2-3: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [7] Terms in this file explaining the outputs or procedures of AI are used figuratively to explain its operations and are not planned to anthropomorphize the maker. [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 advancements will enable human beings to overcome their biological constraints and improve both their physical and cognitive abilities. Posthumanists, on the other hand, contend that such advances will ultimately change human identity to the degree that humankind itself might no longer be considered genuinely "human." Both views rest on a basically negative perception of human corporality, which treats the body more as a challenge than as an essential part of the individual's identity and call to complete realization. Yet, this negative view of the body is irregular with an appropriate understanding of human dignity. While the Church supports authentic scientific progress, it verifies that human self-respect is rooted in "the individual as an inseparable unity of body and soul. " Thus, "self-respect is likewise inherent in everyone's body, which gets involved in its own method remaining in imago Dei" (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita [8 April 2024], par. 18). [10] This approach reflects a functionalist point of view, which minimizes the human mind to its functions and presumes that its functions can be completely quantified in physical or mathematical terms. However, even if a future AGI were to appear really intelligent, it would still remain functional in nature. [11] Cf. A.M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1950) 443-460. [12] If "thinking" is credited to machines, it must be clarified that this describes calculative thinking instead of critical thinking. Similarly, if makers are said to operate using logical thinking, it needs to be defined that this is restricted to computational reasoning. On the other hand, by its very nature, human thought is an imaginative procedure that eludes programming and goes beyond constraints. [13] On the fundamental function of language in forming understanding, cf. M. Heidegger, Über den Humanismus, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 1949 (en. tr. "Letter on Humanism," in Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger, Routledge, London - New York 2010, 141-182). [14] For further conversation 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 advertisement litteram III, 20, 30: PL 34, 292: "Man is made in the image of God in relation to that [faculty] by which he transcends to the illogical animals. Now, this [professors] is reason itself, or the 'mind,' or 'intelligence,' whatever other name it might more suitably be given"; Id., Enarrationes in Psalmos 54, 3: PL 36, 629: "When thinking about all that they have, human beings find that they are most distinguished from animals specifically by the reality they possess intelligence." This is likewise repeated by Saint Thomas Aquinas, who mentions that "man is the most ideal of all earthly beings enhanced with movement, and his correct and natural operation is intellection," by which man abstracts from things and "receives 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 viewpoint that echoes elements of the classical and medieval difference in between these 2 modes of cognition, cf. D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, New York 2011. [19] Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 76, a. 1, resp. [20] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyon, Adversus Haereses, V, 6, 1: PG 7( 2 ), 1136-1138. [21] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 9. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1045: "The intellect can examine the reality of things through reflection, experience and dialogue, and pertain to recognize because reality, which transcends it, the basis of certain universal moral needs." [22] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [23] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 365. Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q. 75, a. 4, resp. [24] Certainly, Sacred Scripture "normally thinks about the human individual as a being who exists in the body and is unthinkable beyond it" (Pontifical Biblical Commission, "Che cosa è l'uomo?" (Sal 8,5): Un itinerario di antropologia biblica [30 September 2019], par. 19). Cf. ibid., pars. 20-21, 43-44, 48. [25] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 22: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1042: Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 7: AAS 100 (2008 ), 863: "Christ did not disdain human bodiliness, however rather fully divulged its meaning and value." [26] Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles II, 81. [27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [28] Cf. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 89, a. 1, resp.: "to be separated from the body is not in accordance with [the soul's] nature [...] and hence it is unified to the body in order that it may have an existence and an operation suitable to its nature." [29] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1035. Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 18. [30] International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 56. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 357. [31] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), pars. 5, 8; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 15, 24, 53-54. [32] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 356. Cf. ibid., par. 221. [33] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 13, 26-27. [34] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Donum Veritatis (24 May 1990), 6: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1552. Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), par. 109: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1219. Cf. Pseudo-Dionysius, De divinis nominibus, VII, 2: PG 3, 868B-C: "Human souls likewise possess reason and with it they circle in discourse around the truth of things. [...] [O] n account of the manner in which they are capable of focusing the numerous into the one, they too, in their own fashion and as far as they can, are deserving of conceptions like those of the angels" (en. tr. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, Paulist Press, New York - Mahwah 1987, 106-107). [35] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 3: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7. [36] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [37] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 42: AAS 91 (1999 ), 38. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 208: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1043: "the human mind is capable of transcending instant issues and grasping certain truths that are unchanging, as true now as in the past. As it peers into human nature, reason finds universal worths obtained from that very same nature"; ibid., par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034. [38] Cf. B. Pascal, Pensées, no. 267 (ed. Brunschvicg): "The last proceeding of reason is to acknowledge that there is an infinity of things which are beyond it" (en. tr. Pascal's Pensées, E.P. Dutton, New York 1958, 77). [39] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 15: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [40] Our semantic capability enables us to understand messages in any kind of interaction in a way that both considers and transcends their material or empirical structures (such as computer code). Here, intelligence becomes a knowledge that "enables us to take a look at things with God's eyes, to see connections, circumstances, occasions and to discover their genuine significance" (Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications [24 January 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8). Our creativity enables us to produce brand-new material or concepts, mainly by offering an initial viewpoint on truth. Both capabilities depend upon the presence of a personal subjectivity for their complete awareness. [41] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. [42] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 184: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1034: "Charity, when accompanied by a commitment to the truth, is much more than personal sensation [...] Certainly, its close relation to fact promotes its universality and maintains it from being 'restricted to a narrow field without relationships.' [...] Charity's openness to fact thus safeguards it from 'a fideism that deprives it of its human and universal breadth.'" The internal quotes are from Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), pars. 2-4: AAS 101 (2009 ), 642-643. [43] Cf. International Theological Commission, Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God (2004 ), par. 7. [44] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization (3 December 2007), par. 4: AAS 100 (2008 ), 491-492. [45] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 13: AAS 91 (1999 ), 15. [46] Bonaventure, In II Librum Sententiarum, d. I, p. 2, a. 2, q. 1; as 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 inhabit an unique place in deep space according to the divine strategy: they take pleasure in the opportunity of sharing in the divine governance of noticeable production. [...] Since male's place as ruler remains in fact an involvement in the magnificent governance of production, we mention it here as a form of stewardship." [49] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), pars. 38-39: AAS 85 (1993 ), 1164-1165. [50] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 33-34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1052-1053. This concept is also shown in the creation 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 development. Cf. John Chrysostom, Homiliae in Genesim, XIV, 17-21: PG 53, 116-117. [51] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 301. [52] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 302. [53] Bonaventure, Breviloquium 2.12.1. Cf. ibid., 2.11.2. [54] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii (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 excellent by picking up and appreciating truths." [61] Dante, Paradiso, Canto XXX: "luce intellettüal, piena d'amore;/ amor di vero ben, pien di letizia;/ letizia che trascende ogne dolzore" (en. tr. The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, C.E. Norton, tr., Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1920, 232). [62] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931:" [T] he greatest norm of human life is the divine law itself-eternal, objective and universal, by which God orders, directs and governs the whole world and the methods of the human neighborhood according to a plan conceived in his knowledge and love. God has actually allowed guy to participate in this law of his so that, under the mild personality of divine providence, lots of might be able to reach a deeper and deeper knowledge of unchangeable reality." Also cf. Id., Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. [63] Cf. First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius (24 April 1870), ch. 4, DH 3016. [64] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [65] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 110: AAS 107 (2015 ), 891. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 204: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1042. [66] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 11: AAS 83 (1991 ), 807: "God has inscribed his own image and likeness on guy (cf. Gen 1:26), providing upon him an incomparable dignity [...] In effect, beyond the rights which man obtains by his own work, there exist rights which do not represent any work he carries out, however which flow from his important self-respect as an individual." Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [67] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 8. Cf. ibid., par. 9; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), par. 22. [68] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2024 ), 310. [69] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [70] In this sense, "Artificial Intelligence" is comprehended as a technical term to indicate this technology, recalling that the expression is also utilized to designate the field of research 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 support of clinical exploration in Albertus Magnus (De Mineralibus, II, 2, 1) and the appreciation for the mechanical arts in Hugh of St. Victor (Didascalicon, I, 9). These authors, amongst a long list of other Catholics participated in scientific research study and technological exploration, illustrate that "faith and science can be joined in charity, supplied that science is put at the service of the guys and lady of our time and not misused to damage or even ruin them" (Francis, Address to Participants in the 2024 Lemaître Conference of the Vatican Observatory [20 June 2024]: L'Osservatore Romano, 20 June 2024, 8). Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 36: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053-1054; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), pars. 2, 106: AAS 91 (1999 ), 6-7.86 -87. [73] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 378. [74] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [75] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [76] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 102: AAS 107 (2015 ), 888. [77] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889; Id., Encyclical Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 27: AAS 112 (2020 ), 978; Benedict XVI, Encyclical Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 23: AAS 101 (2009 ), 657-658. [78] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39, 47; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8 September 2008), passim. [79] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 35: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par 2293. [80] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2-4. [81] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1749: "Freedom makes man an ethical subject. When he acts deliberately, male is, so to speak, the dad of his acts." [82] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 16: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1037. Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1776. [83] Catechism of the Catholic Church, par. 1777. [84] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 1779-1781; Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 463, where the Holy Father motivated efforts "to make sure that innovation remains human-centered, fairly grounded and directed towards the excellent." [85] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 166: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1026-1027; Id., Address to the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (23 September 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 23 September 2024, 10. On the function of human firm in picking a broader aim (Ziel) that then informs the specific function (Zweck) for which each technological application is developed, cf. F. Dessauer, Streit um die Technik, Herder-Bücherei, Freiburg i. Br. 1959, 70-71. [86] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4: "Technology is born for a function and, in its influence on human society, always represents a kind of order in social relations and a plan of power, hence allowing certain people to perform specific actions while preventing others from performing different ones. In a more or less explicit method, this constitutive power-dimension of technology constantly includes the worldview of those who invented and established it." [87] Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy of Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 309. [88] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [89] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, pars. 212-213: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1044-1045. [90] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Laborem Exercens (14 September 1981), par. 5: AAS 73 (1981 ), 589; Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3-4. [91] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "Confronted with the marvels of makers, which seem to know how to select individually, we should be very clear that decision-making [...] must constantly be left to the human person. We would condemn mankind to a future without hope if we eliminated individuals's capability to make choices about themselves and their lives, by dooming them to depend on the choices of devices." [92] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [93] The term "predisposition" in this document refers to algorithmic bias (methodical and consistent mistakes in computer system systems that may disproportionately bias certain groups in unintended ways) or discovering bias (which will result in training on a prejudiced information set) and not the "predisposition vector" in neural networks (which is a parameter used to change the output of "neurons" to change more precisely to the information). [94] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 464, where the Holy Father affirmed the development in consensus "on the requirement for development processes to respect such values as inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and dependability," and likewise welcomed "the efforts of international companies to regulate these technologies so that they promote real progress, contributing, that is, to a 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, akropolistravel.com Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047. [97] Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1571. [98] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. For more discussion of the ethical questions raised by AI from a Catholic perspective, see AI Research Group of the Centre for Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations (Theological Investigations of Artificial Intelligence 1), M.J. Gaudet, N. Herzfeld, P. Scherz, J.J. Wales, eds., Journal of Moral Faith, Pickwick, Eugene 2024, 147-253. [99] On the significance 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; quoting the Final Document of the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops (27 October 2018), par. 24: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1593. Cf. Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Moral Law (12 February 2017): AAS 99 (2007 ), 245. [106] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-33: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047-1050. [107] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. Id., Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), pars. 20-21: AAS 115 (2023 ), 1047. [108] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020): AAS 112 (2020 ), 308-309. [109] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 2: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 2. [110] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892. [111] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 101, 103, 111, 115, 167: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1004-1005, 1007-1009, 1027. [112] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047; cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 35: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 123. [113] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 12: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1034. [114] Cf. Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (2004 ), par. 149. [115] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), par. 3: AAS 58 (1966 ), 931. Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [116] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [117] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 47: AAS 107 (2015 ), 865. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), pars. 88-89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413-414. [118] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057. [119] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 47: AAS 112 (2020 ), 985. [120] Cf. Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [121] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986-987. [122] Cf. E. Stein, Zum Problem der Einfühlung, Buchdruckerei des Waisenhauses, Halle 1917 (en. tr. On the Problem of Empathy, ICS Publications, Washington D.C. 1989). [123] Cf. Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 88: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1057:" [Many individuals] want their interpersonal relationships supplied by advanced equipment, by screens and systems which can be turned on and off on command. Meanwhile, the Gospel tells 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 constant interaction. True faith in the incarnate Son of God is inseparable from self-giving, from membership in the community, from service, from reconciliation with others." Also cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 24: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1044-1045. [124] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 1. [125] Cf. Francis, Address to Participants at the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570; Id, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 18, 124-129: AAS 107 (2015 ), 854.897-899. [126] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [127] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), par. 209: AAS 105 (2013 ), 1107. [128] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 4. For Pope Francis' mentor about AI in relationship to the "technocratic paradigm," cf. Id., Encyclical Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 106-114: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-893. [129] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046-1047.; as priced quote 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 significance of work over the unbiased one." [132] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 128: AAS 107 (2015 ), 898. Cf. Id., Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 24: AAS 108 (2016 ), 319-320. [133] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [134] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), par. 89: AAS 87 (1995 ), 502. [135] Ibid. [136] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 67: AAS 112 (2020 ), 993; as priced quote in Id., Message for the XXXI World Day of the Sick (11 February 2023): L'Osservatore Romano, 10 January 2023, 8. [137] Francis, Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [138] Francis, Address to the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See (11 January 2016): AAS 108 (2016 ), 120. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 18: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975; Id., Message for the XXXII World Day of the Sick (11 February 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 13 January 2024, 12. [139] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465; Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2. [140] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 105, 107: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889-890; Id., Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020 ), 975-976; Id., Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [141] Francis, Address to the Participants at the Meeting Sponsored by the Charity and Health Commission of the Italian Bishops' Conference (10 February 2017): AAS 109 (2017 ), 243. Cf. ibid., 242-243: "If there is a sector in which the throwaway culture appears, with its painful effects, it is that of healthcare. When an ill person is not put in the center or their dignity is not thought about, this triggers attitudes that can lead even to speculation on the misfortune of others. And this is really severe! [...] The application of a business method to the healthcare sector, if indiscriminate [...] may risk discarding humans." [142] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [143] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729. [144] Congregation for Catholic Education, Instruction on making use of Distance Learning in Ecclesiastical Universities and Faculties, I. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration Gravissimum Educationis (28 October 1965), par. 1: AAS 58 (1966 ), 729; Francis, Message for the LXIX World Day of Peace (1 January 2016), 6: AAS 108 (2016 ), 57-58. [145] Francis, Address to Members of the Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education Project (20 April 2022): AAS 114 (2022 ), 580. [146] Cf. Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi (8 December 1975), par. 41: AAS 68 (1976 ), 31, pricing estimate Id., Address to the Members of the "Consilium de Laicis" (2 October 1974): AAS 66 (1974 ), 568: "if [the modern person] does listen to teachers, it is due to the fact that 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 estimate the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, Final Document (27 October 2018), par. 21: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1592. [150] J.H. Newman, The Idea of a University Defined and Illustrated, Discourse 7.6, Basil Montagu Pickering, London 18733, 167. [151] Cf. Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 88: AAS 111 (2019 ), 413. [152] In a 2023 policy file about making use of generative AI in education and research study, UNESCO notes: "Among the key questions [of the usage of generative AI (GenAI) in education and research study] is whether human beings can possibly cede standard levels of thinking and skill-acquisition processes to AI and rather focus on higher-order thinking abilities based on the outputs offered by AI. Writing, for example, is frequently connected with the structuring of thinking. With GenAI [...], humans can now start with a well-structured outline supplied by GenAI. Some experts have defined the usage of GenAI to generate text in this method as 'composing without believing'" (UNESCO, Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research [2023], 37-38). The German-American theorist Hannah Arendt visualized such a possibility in her 1959 book, The Human Condition, and cautioned: "If it must turn out to be real that knowledge (in the sense of knowledge) and thought have actually parted company for good, then we would certainly end up being the helpless servants, not so much of our devices since our know-how" (Id., The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 20182, 3). [153] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), par. 262: AAS 108 (2016 ), 417. [154] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 7: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3; cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 167: AAS 107 (2015 ), 914. [155] John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae (15 August 1990), 7: AAS 82 (1990 ), 1479. [156] Francis, Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium (29 January 2018), 4c: AAS 110 (2018 ), 9-10. [157] Francis, Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 3. [158] For instance, it may assist individuals gain access to the "range of resources for generating higher knowledge of truth" contained in the works of approach (John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio [14 September 1998], par. 3: AAS 91 [1999], 7). Cf. ibid., par. 4: AAS 91 (1999 ), 7-8. [159] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), par. 43. Cf. ibid., pars. 61-62. [160] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [161] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par 25: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053; cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), passim: AAS 112 (2020 ), 969-1074. [162] Cf. Francis., Post-Synodal Exhortation Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), par. 89: AAS 111 (2019 ), 414; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio (14 September 1998), par. 25: AAS 91 (1999 ), 25-26: "People can not be truly indifferent to the question of whether what they know holds true or not. [...] It is this that Saint Augustine teaches when he composes: 'I have actually met many who wanted to trick, however none who wished to be deceived'"; quoting 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 Network (28 May 2023), par. 41; Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Decree Inter Mirifica (4 December 1963), pars. 4, 8-12: AAS 56 (1964 ), 146, 148-149. [166] Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 1, 6, 16, 24. [167] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, (7 December 1965), par. 26: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1046. Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum (15 May 1891), par. 40: Acta Leonis XIII, 11 (1892 ), 127: "no man might with impunity breach that human self-respect which God himself treats with great reverence"; as estimated in John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus (1 May 1991), par. 9: AAS 83 (1991 ), 804. [168] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2477, 2489; can. 220 CIC; can. 23 CCEO; John Paul II, Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate (28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979 ), 202-203. [169] Cf. Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations, Holy See Statement to the Thematic Discussion on Other Disarmament Measures and International Security (24 October 2022): "Maintaining human self-respect in cyberspace obliges States to likewise appreciate the right to privacy, by protecting people from invasive monitoring and enabling them to secure their individual details from unauthorized gain access to." [170] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 42: AAS 112 (2020 ), 984. [171] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 5: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [172] Francis, Address to the Participants in the "Minerva Dialogues" (27 March 2023): AAS 115 (2023 ), 465. [173] The 2023 Interim Report of the United Nations AI Advisory Body determined a list of "early guarantees of AI assisting to attend to climate modification" (United Nations AI Advisory Body, Interim Report: Governing AI for Humanity [December 2023], 3). The document observed that, "taken together with predictive systems that can change data into insights and insights into actions, AI-enabled tools might help develop brand-new methods and investments to reduce emissions, influence brand-new private sector investments in net no, safeguard biodiversity, and build broad-based social resilience" (ibid.). [174] "The cloud" describes a network of physical servers throughout the world that makes it possible for users to shop, process, and manage their information remotely. [175] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 9: AAS 107 (2015 ), 850. [176] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 106: AAS 107 (2015 ), 890. [177] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 60: AAS 107 (2015 ), 870. [178] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), pars. 3, 13: AAS 107 (2015 ), 848.852. [179] Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIX, 13, 1: PL 41, 640. [180] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 77-82: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1100-1107; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), pars. 256-262: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1060-1063; Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (4 April 2024), pars. 38-39; Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2302-2317. [181] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 78: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1101. [182] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. [183] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, pars. 2308-2310. [184] Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), pars. 80-81: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1105. [185] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Address at the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence in Borgo Egnazia (Puglia) (14 June 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 14 June 2024, 2: "We require to guarantee and safeguard an area for correct 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 usage of lethal self-governing weapons systems (LAWS) that lack the appropriate human control would posture basic ethical concerns, considered that LAWS can never ever be morally accountable subjects capable of complying with international humanitarian law." [187] Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 258: AAS 112 (2020 ), 1061. Cf. Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [188] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 80: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1103-1104. [189] Cf. Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3: "Nor can we overlook the possibility of advanced weapons ending up in the wrong hands, helping with, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the organizations of legitimate systems of federal government. In a word, the world does not require brand-new innovations that add to the unfair advancement of commerce and the weapons trade and as a result wind up promoting the folly of war." [190] John Paul II, Act of Entrustment to Mary for the Jubilee of Bishops (8 October 2000), par. 3: Insegnamenti XXIII/2 (200 ), 565. [191] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 79: AAS 107 (2015 ), 878. [192] Cf. Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), par. 51: AAS 101 (2009 ), 687. [193] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Dignitas Infinita (8 April 2024), pars. 38-39. [194] Cf. Augustine, Confessiones, I, 1, 1: PL 32, 661. [195] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), par. 28: AAS 80 (1988 ), 548:" [T] here is a better understanding today that the mere build-up of goods and services [...] is insufficient for the awareness of human joy. Nor, in consequence, does the availability of the many real benefits offered in recent times by science and innovation, including the computer technology, bring flexibility from every type of slavery. On the contrary, [...] unless all the significant body of resources and potential at man's disposal is assisted by an ethical understanding and by an orientation towards the true good of the mankind, it easily turns against male to oppress him." Cf. ibid., pars. 29, 37: AAS 80 (1988 ), 550-551.563 -564. [196] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 14: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1036. [197] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 18: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5. [198] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 27: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 6. [199] Francis, Encyclical Letter Dilexit Nos (24 October 2024), par. 25: L'Osservatore Romano, 24 October 2024, 5-6. [200] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 105: AAS 107 (2015 ), 889. Cf. R. Guardini, Das Ende der Neuzeit, Würzburg 19659, 87 ff. (en. tr. Completion of the Modern World, Wilmington 1998, 82-83). [201] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), par. 34: AAS 58 (1966 ), 1053. [202] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), par. 15: AAS 71 (1979 ), 287-288. [203] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," in C. Mitcham - R. Mackey, eds., Philosophy and Technology: Readings in the Philosophical Problems of Technology, New York 19832, 212-213. [204] N. Berdyaev, "Man and Machine," 210. [205] G. Bernanos, "La révolution de la liberté" (1944 ), in Id., Le Chemin de la Croix-des-Âmes, Rocher 1987, 829. [206] Cf. Francis, Meeting with the Trainees of the Barbarigo College of Padua in the 100th Year of its Foundation (23 March 2019): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 March 2019, 8. Cf. Id., Address to Rectors, Professors, Trainees and Staff of the Roman Pontifical Universities and Institutions (25 February 2023). [207] Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [208] Cf. Bonaventure, Hex. XIX, 3; Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), par. 50: AAS 112 (2020 ), 986: "The flood of details at our fingertips does not produce higher knowledge. Wisdom is not born of quick searches on the internet nor is it a mass of unverified data. That is not the way to mature in the encounter with reality." [209] Francis, Message for the LVIII World Day of Social Communications (24 January 2024): L'Osservatore Romano, 24 January 2024, 8. [210] Ibid. [211] Ibid. [212] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 37: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1121. [213] Francis, Message for the LVII World Day of Peace (1 January 2024), par. 6: L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023, 3. Cf. Id., Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893; Id., Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate (19 March 2018), par. 46: AAS 110 (2018 ), 1123-1124. [214] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Laudato Si' (24 May 2015), par. 112: AAS 107 (2015 ), 892-893. [215] Cf. Francis, Address to the Participants in the Seminar "The Common Good in the Digital Age" (27 September 2019): AAS 111 (2019 ), 1570-1571.